Marilyn Monroe had a higher IQ than Einstein. IQ tests do not accurately reflect intelligence in any way.

Maybe she just didn't utilize her resource and level of intelligence the way Einstein did. Maybe she was too interested in being famous, being in Hollywood, and bedding presidents and the such to go into the field of science or whatever. Clearly being a movie star is more lucrative than being a genius.

what ppl dont know is that there are various forms of IQ tests. there are those for adults and teens/kids and even among those there are different tests. the one that is rated highest has a max IQ of 200 which leonardo da vinci and an unkown math guy is estimated to have or come close to and since we have no idea which type of IQ test he has taken, any discussion about it is mute, but with that said, it sounds more of a fluke than anything else, even a blind chicken finds a worm once in a while.

If you've read Malcolm Gladwell's Outliers on successful people and genius, you'd know that oftentimes high IQ leads nowhere. Not going to regurgitate the entire book but in essence, he showed how a literal/real genius (Christopher Langan, IQ 195) can be completely unsuccessful due to flaws in personality and ability to adapt to social circumstance, and also how Langan's fate was mostly decided by his environmental circumstances.

In other studies, kids with extremely high IQ were put in a longterm study and the majority performed at what is considered "mediocre" in life, with most ending up in "so-so" jobs like office workers and many even becoming blue collar workers or deadbeats.

The point is, IQ is useful to prove you're "smart enough", just like height in basketball. After a certain height (6"2?), it has little to no impact on performance. Yes a 6"6 dude will TRASH a 5"5 guy (some notable exceptions though!), but generally once you're above that threshold of height, it doesn't matter. If the threshold of "smart enough" is 130 points, then two guys one at 131 and one at 180 will succeed solely based on how well they handle social situations, their street smarts, and practice/experience. IQ is moot after that point.

Not trying to comment on GC per se, just saying that his 183 IQ (as you stated) doesn't make him a better developer than a 130 IQ developer. It just means he's "smart enough" to be a developer. I'd also say that it looks like you are fishing for personal attacks on the guy.

IQ is like your height. It has a certain value, true, but what use you make of the value given to you is up to you. There was a lady whose IQ was over 200, but she worked as an ordinary editor in a publishing house.

There's no "standard" IQ test, there're several methodics. Most results on corellation between so-called IQ and professional potential are based on professional IQ tests, like Wechsler's test.

Then again, given the nature test one has to take, it's easy for them to practice to get insane results. Hence, the exact number doesn't mean a thing, only a ballpark and a mention "well above average", which is obvious from Greg's position and his career record.

It means he is smart - he is a marine biologist. Ask him about deep sea crustea and you would know how smart. He worked as a Research Assistant Professor at the University of South Carolina. He also worked with Ensemble Studios on the Age of Empires series of real-time strategy games, during which period he was also known by the screen name "Deathshrimp".

World of Warcraft is just his job he got later in life and he is doing it well enough. One day he will move on.

I have a professionally tested IQ of 162 and for the most part it is useless. While I use that to excel at certain hobbies and interests, I have no ambition to do anything important with it. I have had less college education than my peers and it shows. I am very happy living in my own imagination, and only pursue money as a means to give me more free time with the luxuries I enjoy.

Or as a friend once said, "The smartest men in the world can still obsess over the least useful things."